Inspiration/ Inerrancy / Authority of Scripture - Issuesgreenspun.com : LUSENET : HCDL-OLD : One Thread
This discussion is dedicated to the topic of differing doctrinal views about the inspiration, inerrancy, and authority of the Holy Scriptures (Bible).
-- Charles Burgess (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 13, 1998
From my understanding Peter quoted from the Septuagent (Greek translation of the OT - which was mostly in use at that time). The OT we have is translated from the Masoretic Text which is Hebrew. That to me explains the differences.
Also I take NT interpretations of the OT to be the Spirit revealing to us what is truly meant by the text.
On the subject of how to meet, it seems the NT gives lots of latitude. Maybe we are trying to legislate something that is not met to be that set in concrete.
-- Barry Steinman (Barry@DiscountChristian.com), November 26, 1998.
I have no trouble with the inspiration and inerrancy of the Holy Bible. I think many of the commands were directed toward certain people at a certain time, but that they no longer apply to Christians today. All authority is in Christ Jesus. I obey His voice and seek to be about our Father's business.
-- Eve Engelbrite (Engelbrite@home.com), November 14, 1998.
Eve, Well said. I couldn't say it with less words if I tried.
To me Calling the bible Gods word means this. Which I suspose is why I can't stomach any thought of the bible being Gods word.
1: You can't argue with it.
2: Its a bunch of clear and unambiguous mesages transmitted from above.
3: If I do disagree with it then...
a: I'm in the middle of massive rebelion and about to be hit by a bolt of lighting.
b: I'm sinfull BUT God will show me one day the wonders of his famous book. c: I'll see 'THE TRUTH' one day or re-interpret the bible to suite it.
4: That I am about to go out and rape/ pillage and murder heaps of people because I don't have a book to tell me its wrong.
You see The God I belive in is more powerfull than a book. He is alive and living and ever present in my life. ( scripture testifies to this in many many accounts of people living like this.)
My God seems to be more concerned with my heart and the hearts of his people than some book. If he was that concerned with this book I think he would have made Paul write a little clearer and in more general terms so that we could ( people of many cultures and language gruops and times) have understand.
Pauls writings and the writings of the OT seem to be more concerned with that people of that time and that their hearts remain zealous and in-love with their bride than us today. The God that lives in my heart today is so much more personal. He speaks to me in my language, with my metaphors, and my symbolic mind, and though people who are alive today and tender and precious to me.
-- Martin Irwin (Mirwin@novell.com), November 16, 1998.
You just don't get it. If the Bible were not the Word of God, there's no way it could have lasted the way it has. No other book in the history of mankind has faced the persecution that the Bible has faced. No other book is nearly as old as the Bible. It is only by the power of the living God that we have THE WORD OF GOD today! There is NO DIFFERENCE between the Living Word and the Written Word. They are the SAME period. Try this on for size. By the power of the HOLY SPIRIT HEAR THESE WORDS! THUS SAITH THE LORD: What you say is pure new age transcendentalism, not Christianity. You want to be your own god, make up your own rules, be accountable to no one, have no objective standard of truth so that no one can say that you aren't doing as you should. This I say by the power of the living God Who speaks through me to you! If this means that I'm disconnecting a "relationship", so be it. I will not sacrifice the truth to the god of "relational church". It is impossible for a person to be Christian and believe the Bible to be just another book. There, I said what I've been thinking all week, what I believe with every fiber of my being, and what the Almighty God has been wanting me to say! He who has an ear let him hear what the Spirit says to the church.
-- David L. Johnston (email@example.com), November 19, 1998.
And just maybe you are the one who doesn't "Get it", David! All I heard, saw and discerned in your last reply was Thus Saith David L. Johnston.
Because there is a difference between JESUS The Living Word, God Himself, a Person and the mere book HE yes did inspire by The Spirit.
They ARE NOT the same. The Book wasn't nailed to the cross, Jesus was! The book didn't shed HIS blood for our victory, JESUS did!
No One has promoted New Age transcendentalism, but you have promoted man's understanding and translational abilities over the POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT to be able to "convict us all in matters of sin, rightgeousness and judgement." You speak of an objective standard of truth, and yet is not your understanding and application of scripture wholly subjective and captive by a mere man's understanding?
I sir will not sacrifice the Truth in Love to a god translated by mere men and bound by the hands and devices of men into neatly packaged "truths".
'As many are led by The Spirit of God (notice not the bible book) will be called the children of God.'
And I'll close with your quote which proves my point again: To those who have ears let them hear what THE SPIRIT says to the church.
-- Christopher Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 19, 1998.
How do you know all these things without the Bible? You would know nothing about the death, burial, resurrection, leading and instruction of the Holy Spirit without the Bible. The very thing you use to support your argument is the very thing you're arguing against. If the Bible is not the Word of God, why do you use it as your source for final authority when you say it is not the source of final authority? You cannot have it both ways. And no, that was not thus saith Daivd L. Johnston. I prayed and prayed over this. I've struggled against doing this for the last week. Those words are from God Almighty. If you don't think they are, show me an objective authority that says they aren't. According to your own argument, the living Word within us is the final source of authority. Well the living Word has spoken. Prove otherwise. Don't you see?
-- David L. Johnston (email@example.com), November 19, 1998.
David, You know my opinion so I won't repeat it.
Your spirit of control has manifested itself. None of your acusations fit me. I wish not to answer them but do wish to say and ask you not to repeat them as they are un-true. Please do not take these horrid things on to others on other christian lists. I'm hurt that you say these things.
I'm glad that this is an OLD we don't have to put up with such demeaning behaviour on the HCDL.
-- Martin Irwin (Mirwin@novell.com), November 19, 1998.
O.K., I'm sorry for asking, but I just jumped in on this. Martin or Chris, I'm wondering, and please don't take this wrong, but of what use is the Bible for you today as Christians? All that I have heard is one side of your case, could you tell me how the Scriptures are useful? Now I really wish that I could have had a chance to talk to you about this in Portland, Chris! Remember, we were going to do so, but... Oh well. Looking forward to your response!
-- John Contabile (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 19, 1998.
I'll try and define my problem here. The Bible is inspired. Its definitliy proved this worthines in all of these things over the years in the church. I get inspired to love and good works from reading it. This is true. It can be used to correct me and I do use it a measuring stick sometimes to measure other books.
My only beaf the name. TO me calling the bible the Word of God is lessing the name of Jesus. Thats all. finito nothing else do I have a problem with. If you call it "The Word of God" then you have to make the bible inerrant. The mental gynastics that one has to do to see this book as inerrant.
I wonder if Paul, when he wrote his letters, would be saying now if he new his little old letters, both personal and to churches, were now given all authority in heaven to rule in peoples lives. I'd cringe if someone in 2000 years did that to me.
SO, yes I enjoy reading,studing, and disussing the Bible but I can't for the life of me take it to equal Jesus in authority and stature and importance.
As Chris said The bible didn't die on the cross for us Jesus did.
-- Martin Irwin (email@example.com), November 19, 1998.
You PROVE it!
You seem to be saying that the bible illuminates and confirms the Spirit, seems to me it's the other way around.
I know this IS mostly semantics, however I feel that at least the semantics should side more strongly with identifying with the Person of God than HIS book.
After all God is a God of relationship, and relationships involve persons, not just books.
Does this help?
Perhaps you should pray more.
-- Christopher Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 19, 1998.
Hi John C.,
Glad to try an oblige you.
First everyone calm down! I'm not angry, mad or anything like that. I'm smiling as I am writing. DCB'S DCB'S - Deep cleansing breaths!
I want to start by pointing out that those of us who have shared so far really aren't disagreeing too much about the root of the matter. We just differ some in perspective, or the way we have come to understand and explain what we feel God has revealed to us. And I feel this is just great. (with the exception of thus saith the Lord's) God has offered us all a "table of truth and love" to eat and grow from. Nice to know that it is always a banquet or buffet; instead of an Ala' carte burger and fries served up by one clowns opinion (sorry Ronald). It is however very important that we all are talking about the same Spiritual meat.
Like I said before, so much of this is semantics.
I too am what many scholars would call a student of the scriptures, but what makes me uneasy about saying we must be a "student" is that it *can* tend to exhalt our intellects. And also exclude those who feel they are not smart enough to be a good christian. Having humble and open hearts always triumphs over book learned smarts IMHO.
Still many say that the bible is "The only standard of truth which we have", or "The final authority".
The reason this makes me cringe is that it elevates doctrine to the ruler and head over all, and it tends to negate and destroy what I feel is every persons reason for existence: RELATIONSHIP WITH THE LORD and each other.
Having the bible as "the only standard of truth" has not produced the type of fruit God desires in the plethora of institutional/traditional churches that have wavied that flag proudly for centuries has it ?
Sure the bible is "A" standard of truth, but I just can't elevate it to "the standard". The bible is not God! And God is THE STANDARD! Sure the bible in one of the tools that God has supplied us with so we can understand the standard (HIM), but I cannot equate the two.
Here is an interesting take on this:
We all know the bible says, that "every matter must be established on the testimony of 2 or 3 witnesses." And I don't think that necessarily means like I have heard taught, "Yep, I got my three witnesses. This scripture, that scripture, and this here other scripture quote. That's 3 ain't it?"
I beleive that it could rather suggest a checks and balances "system" (oh I hate that word) that God offers us so we can avoid gross errors in judgement.
1 John 5:8 seems clear (at least to me) here. It says that "There are three witnesses (these 3 testify) the Spirit, the water, and the Blood."
Here we got 1. the Holy Spirit for confirmation. 2. The water, which thru my studies prove to be LIFE - but not in the sense of circumstances; but rather in the light of relationship with others who share this new life from God. i.e. -mutual accountability and the answered prayers of the saints. And 3. the Blood, Jesus Himself and His testimony which is recorded in the bible. And Jesus is the Word after all. However, I don't equate Jesus being the Word as the same as HE being the scriptures. Jesus is much more comprehensive than that.
Hope I haven't confused anyone, but rahter given food for thought.
And yes David, I know I had to use the scriptures to prove my point ;) And I agree that the bible is part of the standard of truth, but it is joined and supportrd by much more than itself. Which to me gives it even more validity and creedence than if it stood alone.
One more point and then I'll git out of here. Folks are right when they say the Spirit is reliable, but we humans are not. We can easily be decieved by our own feelings and thoughts. People have used the Spirit told me so to do some vile things throughout history.
But the same thing can be said for those who have claimed the bible as their only standard of truth. People have used the bible to enslave and dominate others for centuries. The KKK use it to promote racism and hatred. Think of the crusades and the inquisition where many were slaughtered in the name of the WORD. Women have been told to stay in relationships where they were battered and beaten because they were told the bible says so. The list goes on and on.
Problem is we are human. We quite easily are decieved by our own feelings and thoughts about even the bible. Our interpretations of what we read in there can be grossly full of error.
So I just can't trust myself with only one standard of truth.
Unless that standard is JESUS and the many ways HE reveals Himself.
p.s. Does the bible reveal the truth of the Spirit, or the Spirit the truth of the bible?
And didn't the Spirit have to reveal to the authors what to write?
I am thankful for confirmation from all the resources our source, The Lord, had provided me. I long for both the forest and the trees. What a view, it's beautiful!
-- Christopher Kirk (email@example.com), November 19, 1998.
Dear brothers & sisters in Christ,
In RE: the responses by and to David Johnston; I'd like to quote from my introduction-post to HCDL: [I wrote]>>First of all, I would like to assure all of you: that with every message/post that I read I will give it's author the benefit-of- the-doubt that he/she is trying (and is) to be: sincere; helpful; curious; intelligent; and worth my time. I do not try to read into the message the personality of it's author or make a judgement on any aspect of the author's personality from the content of the message, nor do I take things personally- I can't and won't do it, because of the limitations of this medium.
Most who communicate in e-forums are not best-selling authors, I've certainly NOT mastered the English language by any measure. It is too easy in a medium/forum such as this to come off as a know-it-all or a know-nothing-at-all, when in fact you are just trying to be helpful. Remember - I cannot hear the inflection in your voice or read your body language as you speak, all of which are vital clues in communication, which also is difficult even when face-to-face.<<
Also remember that this topic can bring out very strong sediments ... let us all cut each other a large line of slack - due to the limitations of communicating in this way. Please keep an open mind to allow for clarifications. I constantly will do this for all, please reciprocate this among us all. When I write to you, I always anticipate that I'll need to further clarify what I write ... I am imperfect.
[Chris wrote]>>People have used the bible to enslave and dominate others for centuries. The KKK use it to promote racism and hatred. Think of the crusades and the inquisition where many were slaughtered in the name of the WORD.<<
That is exactly a valid point, some has misused His word. Through this OLD study, maybe a edifying inquiry into this topic can be made. Remember that the apostle Peter stated that the scriptures are not subject to private interpretation. It is this private interpretation that drives "scripture twisting". (KKK's use of the Bible as a basis for their agenda, relies upon their incoherent/moronic interpretation and total fabrication, to justify their agenda/views.)
Our own written attempts at communicating, if that is all we have to go by, can give a somewhat distorted impression of who we actually are and what we have in mind ... our written communication has limitations. But if you walk together in person, face-to-face, our communication can be much fuller. If all of our communication is oral only, then our fallible memories cannot remember all of what is communicated ... oral communication alone can also lead to distortions in communication. With both written and oral face-to- face communication together, any possible distortions can be clarified. As for me, in matters of life and death, heaven and hell ... I need both the written word and the Living Word, the full spectrum of Divine Communication ... nothing less. I give equal weight to His written and verbal instructions ... they both came from His mind ... His words are His words, whether oral or written.
Jesus thanked his Father above, for making the word of God so simple that the least of society would understand and respond to it, but hidden its understanding from the Scribes and Pharisees (read..."theologians") who couldn't comprehend this Christ. Read and interpret the scriptures just as you would other literature, yet with great reverence for its Author. After all, God did in fact "write" the greatest work of literature that the world has ever known ... and unlike imperfect humans, God can perfectly communicate His will through written means. Then He walks and speaks to you, clarifying the meaning of the written word in relation to the situation that you face ... and much more.
There are a few warnings in the scriptures about arguing over the meaning of words, etc. God didn't intend for our understanding of what He has to say (verbally or written), to differ to such a degree as it seems. In the Bible, it generally just means what it says. And when the Holy Spirit speaks, He doesn't say anything that differs much from the scriptures...He speaks mostly to the timing of its application in a particular situation. God does what He does, and says what He says, and means what He says and does ... which is at times, beyond our complete comprehension (an understatement).
[Chris wrote]>>I beleive that it could rather suggest a checks and balances "system" (oh I hate that word) that God offers us so we can avoid gross errors in judgement.<< I find the checks and balances to be the written word AND the Living Word - BOTH. The written word alone can lead to extreme legalism. And Spirit alone can lead to an extreme too. Jesus said that the path to heaven is straight and narrow. For me, I seek to walk this narrow path in as safe a manner as possible, one foot at a time (Satan aims to make our walk on this narrow path as treacherous as he can). If I walk too near to either edge (extreme) of this path, I may find myself in danger of straying from the path. Therefore, I seek to walk in the middle of this narrow path. (I have had the pleasure of mountian climbing/backpacking experiences.) The written word illuminates and confirms the Spirit, and the Spirit illuminates and confirms the written word ... they work together. It is not one or the other, it is BOTH.
The Lord asked of me for my unconditional surrender and obedience to His will (written and oral)... handed me the cup. I took it with both hands...and drank deeply, heartedly. Not my will, but let Thy Will be done. I have counted the cost.
[Martin wrote]>>The mental gynastics that one has to do to see this book as inerrant.<<
Martin, please explain in more detail what you mean by this, I am truly interested.
As always, my responses are tempered by what Jesus said ... if you have done it to the least of these, my brethren, you have done it to Me. How I have treated my brothers and sisters in the body of Christ, is how I have treated Jesus Christ Himself. This is a tempering realization for me ... drink the cup.
your brother in Christ Jesus,
P.S. I am working on a post that deals with the historical availability of the written word, factors in its survival, etc., and the factors of the interaction of the Living Word in this perspective. I welcome any input.
Charles Burgess Pace FL USA firstname.lastname@example.org
-- Charles Burgess (email@example.com), November 20, 1998.
Martin and Chris, thank you for clarifying the issue for me. Charles, thank you for your post.
I would like to say that Charles has already said what I would have said, so it need not be said again! Essentially, "the Word of God" as God's written form of communication is just that - what He has said in the past and had godly men write down for the rest of His Body! For the record, I do agree and believe that God, through the Holy Spirit does speak to us today, but the issue seems to be more about God's speech in the past.
Now, I too would agree that the written words of God, the Bible - both New and Old Testaments, are not to be elevated above the speaker, whether it be Jesus or God the Father. However, they are still His words!!! Now, please bear with a perhaps questionable and in no way equative analogy. When our President gave his taped testimony (jeer ;-)) those were his words that were recorded for all time. Centuries from now, they will still be his words, but they will never be greater than the office of President. Now the analogy breaks down because God is not voted in and out of office, but I hope you get the point -
God's words represent all that He is, but will never overtake Him as God!!! Because God is truth, His words are true representations of His being/essence. Jesus said that in seeing Him (Jesus) we could know the Father, hence, he too is God, indeed "The Word!"
So, are we on the same page here? I think that we are, but like Chris said, we are easily caught up in semantical debate. I believe, however, that such a debate, at least for us, has arisen out of a reaction to someone elses poor use of the Scriptures. I mean, if someone were to cut up Clinton's testimony to make it sound as though he were innocent, then they would be misusing the tape! (Get it!!!) Just because some wacko says "the Bible says we should drink poison and catch the latest comet to heaven" should ruin neither the truth of what God has written nor how we personally feel about it.
Basically, I guess that what I am saying is this: When God speaks to us, however that may be, we should be amazed that he loves and cares about us so much. Either way he speaks, His speech will reflect His character, and His character never changes!
In Christ and with His love, John
-- John Contabile (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 20, 1998.
John said.... "When our President gave his taped testimony (jeer ;-)) those were his words that were recorded for all time. Centuries from now, they will still be his words, but they will never be greater than the office of President. Now the analogy breaks down because God is not voted in and out of office, but I hope you get the point - "
The only thing wrong with this analogy is this " The bible was written as a testiment to the "Words of God" that these people heard. Apart from the ten commandments God did NOT write the bible Man did.
WHereas You president, as sick is he is in mind spirit and body, did say these things and they are HIS words uttered directly from HIS mouth. ( America is very very sick you guys very very sick.) The world is seeing an end the the glory days of this Land.) SOrry this is another thread we could start.....
-- Martin Irwin (Mirwin@novell.com), November 22, 1998.
Well now which is it is the Bible inspired or is it not??? Above, you said "The Bible is inspired." Now you say that the only thing God actually wrote was the ten commandments, the rest was of men! So which is it??? You must clarify this as this is a gross contradiction!
Regarding Americans being sick, I would first of all have to ask in what way? If you say that we are sick because of our sin, well, it is true! But this is also true of Aussies! If we are sick because we are living in America, well, that Brother Martin, borders on predjudice, which at the root is sin! I guess either way you look at it you are sick too!!!
With that aside, now that we all understand that we are sinful men who have been redeemed by our Lord, Jesus Christ, lets get back to the topic at hand. Are we on the same page or not? I know that you read my post because it obviously upset you. I am sorry, for I did not mean for that to happen. It was merely an illustration, and a poor one at that! However, will you please think through my last post again and tell me if you agree, disagree, or are indifferent to what I wrote!
By the way, did you understand my post, Chris???
Sincerely, in Christ, John
-- John Contabile (email@example.com), November 22, 1998.
John, No I'm not upset by your post. IN the spirit of oneness in christ let us work on this together. Do we have to agree or disagree ( ie takes sides on this.) I've attempted to define my position on this in a couple of posts above this.. ( scrol up and you'll see it....)
The American government ( read the heart of america) is sick. It tolerates lieing and adultery. If this is you then the shoe fits..... I don't think it does with you and wasn't directed at you.
This is not the topic at hand so lets drop it or start a new thread ok.... I'm sorry I bought it up. You brought up the story about Clinton.I haven't seen the same issue in Australia being tolerated. We haven't had to face such evil in our governent. That is NOT to say we aren't that evil.
The bible is inpsired but written by man and therefore prone to error. In one sentence that defines what I believe. If I then go on to say that the bible is Gods word then I have to say that is NOT errant. I can't say this.
-- martin Irwin (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 22, 1998.
Thank you, brother, for the sincere response.
Here is an interesting note regarding "inerrancy" in the New Testament for anyone interested:
Throughout the entire New Testament, only 0.4% is unclear in the original text (Greek). None of these "errancies," if we may call them such, affect any Christian doctrines.
In other words, I have a Bible with 255 pages of New Testament text. This means that only 1.27 pages are in some sort of error.
Here is an example of an "error" that I am currently dealing with. In 1 Thessalonians 2:7, Paul states that "we were gentle among you." But the "error" lies in the fact that the ancient Greek texts differ as to which word was intended by Paul. You see, some texts use the word "epioi" while others use the word "nepioi!" See the similarity; only one letter difference! So, some translations say Paul was gentle "epioi" and others say he became like a child "nepioi."
When it comes down to it, this is the most difficult type of "error" we find in the Bible, some are even easier to deal with than that! The point is that it doesn't really affect our relationship with our Lord! The Scriptures still represent God's message despite the mistakes of men!
I, too, used to struggle with the errors in the Scriptures, but as you begin to understand that they aren't as disasterous to our faith as some claim them to be, it assures us that God is and always will be in charge of what he wishes to say to the world!!! Of course, this is only one way, out of many, that God can and does speak. For this I give Him praise!!!
-- John Contabile (email@example.com), November 23, 1998.
John, NO I don't struggle with the fact the the scriptures are errant. They are only a shadow of the real "Gods word" and that is Christ. YOu cannot get accuracy from a Shadow allthough you can see the outline of accuracy. Shadows don't give colour and meaning and never move of themselves.
Lets worship the one true Word of God and that is Christ himself. He only ever speaks whats he hears his father speaking. He NEVER wanted or desired equality with the Father which seems to be what some people want to do with the shadow of Gods word. They want to elevate it to be equal with Jesus. It is not. IMHO.
-- Martin Irwin (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 23, 1998.
I would be the first to agree with you - we MUST NOT worship the Bible, only God. Good point!
I just hope that you understood what I wrote about the "errors" in the Bible. I believe that there are no errors that are too difficult for us to understand or that misrepresent God's communication to us. God's voice is clearly, and inerrantly heard in the Bible, don't you agree?
-- John Contabile (email@example.com), November 23, 1998.
John, Its does seem that we are the only people interested in talking through this doesn't it? Well now anyway. The others are just watching us of not interested....
Errors in the bible? DO I understand? Yes I understand that through God we can read the bible and we hear his voice. I understand that because of God we can know and understand a lot of the bible. I do not think that we hear Gods voice through the bible because its in-errant. We hear Gods voice becuase he speaks to us. As Genisis testifys to.
God spoke and the world came into being. It was not because of what was there prior to creation that we came about. The dominant theme in Genesis is God initiated and spoke into being **creation**. God is still moving and working on this earth and it is NOT realiant on us doing a thing. God speaks <<<----->>> We listen. Us listening doesn't mean God is going to speak.
Let us let God be God and humans be humans and creation be creation. We respond to Gods work in us and, as it were, speak the very words that God gives us to speak. I view the writers of the NT and OT like this. What we read is their response to what God was speaking into their lives.
To me the bible is merely a painted picture of what these cultures and generations saw. Possibly an essantial picture but a picture none the less. The Picture fades into insignifigance when the we meet up with the real thing. That is When God speaks to us.
Possibly, if you like we can look at the problems between what Jesus said and what the NT writtings wrote as a way to finding some errors in the bible. Perhaps Peter was off in his inspired speach in Acts. Perhaps Paul should have worked on the root cause of why he disallowed Women their voice in his letter to that church. I mean if it was ThAT important then why did Jesus allow women a voice in his speaking engagements?
-- Martin Irwin (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 23, 1998.
Greetings brothers and sisters,
I'm just waiting. In my last post:
"[Martin wrote]>>The mental gynastics that one has to do to see this book as inerrant.<<
Martin, please explain in more detail what you mean by this, I am truly interested."
I want to come to where you are, and fully see it from your perspective. My question is from my heart.
Please don't take my quietness to be either non-interest or agreement or disagreement ... I'm just waiting ... in warm and tender patience from the One who lives in us. Remember, I've waited 15 years as described on my most recent post on hcdl. So, don't worry, I haven't forgotten, I'm not in any hurry ... I can wait.
your brother in Christ Jesus,
-- Charles Burgess (email@example.com), November 23, 1998.
Sorry, I had forgotten to address this earlier:
In abuses in the use of scripture: [Chris wrote]>>Women have been told to stay in relationships where they were battered and beaten because they were told the bible says so.<<
What you say is true, some do say this, as you quoted.
Actually, the apostle Paul stated that the woman could leave in these circustances, no "if's", "and's" or "but's" about it.
This is the problem of the doctrines of demons that run rampant in the IC-denominational-system. Remember the warning in the first chapter of Galatians, about preaching another Gospel? Those who say that the "Bible" says that a woman has to stay with their husband when beaten and battered, falls under the condemnation of preaching another gospel.
I'm not talking about you Chris, I do realize that you were quoting others who twist and pervert the word of God, and harm the innocent in the process. I am glad that you brought this forward. Be assured, what I say below does not apply to you (or anyone else in this OLD).
I have withstood in the face, those who have told women to stay in the abuse because the "Bible" says so. And have I have said to those who say such: that they are an abomination in the eyes of God.
Same goes for the KKK (and the local clan lives all around us, and meets next door to us: keeps our existence here lively).
I think that I have just crossed into the hcdl-thread: Last Days (judging) - yes, we do in some circumstances, judge among ourselves (doesn't apply to KKK, they are not of us), carefully.
your brother in Christ,
-- Charles Burgess (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 24, 1998.
Charles asked.... "The mental gynastics that one has to do to see this book as inerrant.<< "
What about things like Acts? Where Peter seems to miss quote the old testement. Do we say hey, thats just how thems mis-quoted the old testment. Or they they.... " It must be us or we must be mis-interpreting the way he said it?" I mean Go figure?
What about women? If women really were meant to be silent then why didn't Jesus instruct it in his sermons on the mount?
What about the church? If the way we meet is so important then why did NOt Jesus seem to care about the way we meet? He had three years right? Why couldn't he have like written a note for us only to be opened on the day of pentecost about "when we meet?"
The above is what I call the mental gymnastics we tend to have to do to make the bible work the way we want it to?
Why can't we say WHAT peter you've got the verse wrong. And Women can't speak? That just rediculous. Forget it. Instead we end up with long winded theologies and descriptions and books and books of supportive material attempting to explain "Gods word". And the simple thing we just have to admit to ourselves that would save us all the time and effort is "Hey,this book is flawed we can disagree with it, it won't send us to hell if we do, and HEY, We;ve got Jesus the real Gods word!"
-- Martin Irwin (email@example.com), November 26, 1998.
Dear brother Martin,
I have been away from my computer for several days during the Thanksgiving Holidays.
Thank you for your reply, obviously from deep within your heart, in answer to my question. I know enter a "listening mode", wherein I listen to you without trying to form my own response at the same time ... so that I can truly "hear" you and understand what you have said. Then I'll feedback to you what it sounded like to me.
If there are any differences in what you intended to communicate to me, and what I heard and my understanding of your communication ... then you have the chance to clarify, toward the aim of your "intention" matching my "understanding". This making sure that I "heard" what you "said".
All this takes place before I even begin to respond to your statements. (This sounds more complicated than it really is.) This is the effort I make in seeking genuine communication and understanding between you, my precious brother in Christ Jesus, and myself (imperfect clay).
your brother in Christ,
-- Charles Burgess (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 01, 1998.
Incredible! Does hcdl stand for "heresy church digest list"?
-- Christian (email@example.com), February 04, 1999.
If we love God then we should try to know Him better and have a profound personal relationship with Him. But we have two problems: (1) how shall we express our love that would make us more close to Him? (2) how can we know Him better?
In order to love our Lord we have to understand Him, or in other words, to know Him better; thus, those above two problems are very closely related. Our God possesses something we human beings also have, namely Personhood. Our God is a Person who has a character. My wish is to know His character, to grow in His wisdom. However, in order to grow in His wisdom, I need to share His thoughts, His very mind. "For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ (1 Cor. 2:16)" The only way to understand the thoughts of our beloved Lord is to respect and love His words. It is only through His words we are able to come in touch with His very thoughts. Let us, therefore, have David's attitude and exclaim a praise to God by praising His words:
"How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth! The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple (Ps 119:103, 130)."
Your brother, Aleksandar
-- Aleksandar Katanovic (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 05, 2000.